Originally Posted by runwiththewind

Shoot-to-kill would then be an illegal action, even if it were government policy. Bloody Sunday was both an immoral and illegal ac. Yet there was no punishment, only promotion. Where were these thinking soldiers of yours that day?

A fighter pilot dropping bombs on Tehran, knowing it was a city full of civilians, was committing an illegal and immoral act on an innocent nation and people. Where was the moral thinking on those missions?

You do realise what you are saying, is in reality, a load of nonsense. An army cannot function with thinking subordinates. Orders must be obeyed and all that.

A campaign of shooting suspected IRA members on sight would have been illegal, which is one of the reasons why there wasn't one (although I do agree that some ambushes etc were questionable).

Soldier F's actions on Bloody Sunday were illegal and immoral. He and any others who deliberately shot unarmed people got away with it. Soldier F was thinking - about running his own reprisal campaign (he never received an order to shoot protestors).

I have been in an army. I know from first hand experience that, even just from the narrow point of view of getting things done, soldiers need to think, to show initiative, not just blindly follow orders.

Originally Posted by DavidCaldwell

A campaign of shooting suspected IRA members on sight would have been illegal, which is one of the reasons why there wasn't one (although I do agree that some ambushes etc were questionable).

Soldier F's actions on Bloody Sunday were illegal and immoral. He and any others who deliberately shot unarmed people got away with it. Soldier F was thinking - about running his own reprisal campaign (he never received an order to shoot protestors).

I have been in an army. I know from first hand experience that, even just from the narrow point of view of getting things done, soldiers need to think, to show initiative, not just blindly follow orders.

Sorry we are discussing the War of Independence on this thread (Harris also likes to conflate the Northern troubles with this war). The British Army, Auxiliaries & Black and Tans carried out many summary executions particularly in Cork.

Not only are you unthinking, your'e brainwashed.

No shoot-to-kill policy, you say, yet dozens of unarmed citizens are dead.

Of course there was an order given to shoot on Bloody Sunday.

How useful would you have been to the army if you questioned every order given.

Nothing to say about dropping bombs on a city full of civilians?

Originally Posted by SideysGhost

In yer hole it is. In your world wrong is only done by damnable rebels and the glorious redcoats are automatically in the right at all times

I find it hilarious how easy it is, and has always been, to demolish the ludicrous insanity of Harrisite blethering, and yet despite the ease of its demolishment it has somehow retained a grip over the Irish media for decades. 40 feckin years and none of you have bothered going toe-to-toe with this raving nonsense. Do I have to do everything for you wastrels? Come on, WTF? What on earth is wrong with you all? If Sidey can in a few short posts on this thread demolish Harrisism, how come it has survived the last 40 years? Man the f*** up you worthless gombeen fools.

I had to fight the Romans, I had to fight the FFailures, and most of ye sat by and said f**k all. I was calling out Ahern for being a corrupt criminal 12 years ago, and where were all of ye? Paddies. Cowardly treacherous scumbags the lot of ye.

Ahem, I have engaged in close quarter combat with Harrisists of all shapes and sizes for years. But after a while you wonder 'what's the point?': you might as well be talking to a brick wall.

Originally Posted by Liza G

Being from the West Cork area I have a passing knowledge of Canon Salter, Mr Draper ( who celebrated his 100th birthday last month in The Church Restaurant, Skibbereen and is still hale and hearty - a remarkable man ) and Eoghan Harris. Even today the events of the 1920's are often spoken about by the people of the region. Each family has their own take on the happenings of the period and this folklore is passed down from generation to generation. Very often the stories may not concur with the reality but perception is a powerful truth.
Events are open to different interpretations depending on which side of the divide one stands. Even within families interpretations may differ. Having recently spoken to members of Canon Salters family, they would not all have the same take on events of the period. I believe Mr Harris has done a disservice to the people of West Cork and is in danger of reopening wounds that have largely healed.
Last Sunday, 18 year old Darren Sweetnam, a Dunmanway Protestant and a student at Bandon Grammar School, starred for the Cork hurlers. What was remarkable about this was not his religion or his school background or his age but rather the fact that someone from Dunmanway could make the Cork hurling team. We have moved on.

The people who defend Eoghan Harris on this and other threads maintain a fiction that he speaks for southern Protestants. He speaks for no one but himself. When posts like the one above arrive on the site, they are quickly ignored.

Before Tom Cooper made his successful complaint to RTE he asked the Sunday Independent for a right of reply. He was, not surprisingly, refused, not least because he quoted a Church of Ireland clergyman who was attacked for disagreeing with Harris. It is on the Irish Volunteers.org website:

Sectarian narrative about the Irish War of Independence
To: Anne Harris, Editor, Sunday Independent
Subject: Eoghan Harris, columnist, Sunday Independent
From: Tom Cooper, Citizen of a Republic
Date: 25 April 2012

...... Protestants who speak out today... are subject to Eoghan Harris’s attempt to intimidate those who question him.

This happened to a Church of Ireland clergyman who criticised Eoghan Harris for resuscitating his 1985 Souper Sullivan play in 1995 as The Apostasy of Mathew Sullivan. Harris responded by accusing the Protestant clergyman of writing ‘against his own real wishes’ and moaned again that Protestants should ‘[stand] up for themselves’. The Rev’d N. M. Cummins did and derided the suggestion that he did not know and express his own mind. He especially stood up for himself by concluding,

‘This correspondence raises an even deeper issue. In Eoghan Harris’s brave new Ireland there seems to be a place for everyone who agrees with him, but none for divergent opinions, constructive criticism or even rational debate. This falls very short of the noble republican ideal to cherish all the people of the nation equally’.

The Rev’d Cummins ministered in Altar Rectory, Tooormore, Goleen, Cork, the church built in 1847 that was the centrepiece to Harris’s farcical and sectarian Souper Sullivan famine play.

Gerry Colgan wrote about the 1995 production in the Irish Times that it ‘does not and probably could not transcend the limitations of the script’. The same is true of Harris propaganda today. It is the sound of one hand clapping itself on the back. Readers should go elsewhere for an alternative and objective view.

Originally Posted by James Doherty

The people who defend Eoghan Harris on this and other threads maintain a fiction that he speaks for southern Protestants. He speaks for no one but himself. When posts like the one above arrive on the site, they are quickly ignored.

Before Tom Cooper made his successful complaint to RTE he asked the Sunday Independent for a right of reply. He was, not surprisingly, refused, not least because he quoted a Church of Ireland clergyman who was attacked for disagreeing with Harris. It is on the Irish Volunteers.org website:

Sectarian narrative about the Irish War of Independence
To: Anne Harris, Editor, Sunday Independent
Subject: Eoghan Harris, columnist, Sunday Independent
From: Tom Cooper, Citizen of a Republic
Date: 25 April 2012

...... Protestants who speak out today... are subject to Eoghan Harris’s attempt to intimidate those who question him.

This happened to a Church of Ireland clergyman who criticised Eoghan Harris for resuscitating his 1985 Souper Sullivan play in 1995 as The Apostasy of Mathew Sullivan. Harris responded by accusing the Protestant clergyman of writing ‘against his own real wishes’ and moaned again that Protestants should ‘[stand] up for themselves’. The Rev’d N. M. Cummins did and derided the suggestion that he did not know and express his own mind. He especially stood up for himself by concluding,

‘This correspondence raises an even deeper issue. In Eoghan Harris’s brave new Ireland there seems to be a place for everyone who agrees with him, but none for divergent opinions, constructive criticism or even rational debate. This falls very short of the noble republican ideal to cherish all the people of the nation equally’.

The Rev’d Cummins ministered in Altar Rectory, Tooormore, Goleen, Cork, the church built in 1847 that was the centrepiece to Harris’s farcical and sectarian Souper Sullivan famine play.

Gerry Colgan wrote about the 1995 production in the Irish Times that it ‘does not and probably could not transcend the limitations of the script’. The same is true of Harris propaganda today. It is the sound of one hand clapping itself on the back. Readers should go elsewhere for an alternative and objective view.

Harris is manna from heaven for the hate-mongers of the Orange Order.

Harris and Myers got great praise from academic John Paul McCarthy in last sunday's Sindo. McCarthy said that Harris's intellectual appointment to the senate by Bertie was the greatest since Garrett appointed Prof James Dooge in 1981.

Originally Posted by Eoin Coir

McCarthy said that Harris's intellectual appointment to the senate by Bertie was the greatest since Garrett appointed Prof James Dooge in 1981.

Was it in the funny pages section? Then again it is the Sindo.

Regards...jmcc

Originally Posted by DavidCaldwell

Your reference acknowledges that the people who had decided to kill them shot them repeatedly but left them alive

Originally Posted by Stasia

Another of Harris's projects that went pear-shaped when the facts were checked.
Dublin Review of Books | A House Built on Sand - A response to Getting Them Out, Southern Loyalists in the War of Independence (drb, Issue 9 Spring 2009) - Philip O

As the medical reports confirm, they did not, after all, receive fatal wounds. They were attended to over the following hours by at least three doctors.

I agree that it may have been by accident, but it sounds malicious. As the reviews says, it is normal, in executions, to ensure that the person is dead. I suspect that the reviewer may have been influenced by the pre-conception that the IRA were the "good guys" and so could do no wrong. I think it is important that we all recognise that there are people on all sides who ware capable of doing wrong.

How it 'sounds' depends on how the story is told and how the listener interprets that. For example, the people who shot them hadn't "decided to kill them", they were soldiers carrying out legal orders. The piece comments on the failure of the officer in charge:

A House Built on Sand
Philip O’Connor and Pat Muldowney, Dublin Review of Books
Firing squads were notoriously inaccurate, and firing squad duty distasteful and repulsive to soldiers who would mostly have preferred to be anywhere else. ... The result was often “botched” executions in which a coup de grace had to be delivered by the officer in charge. The failure of the officer in charge at Coolacrease to do this is essentially the complaint which is often made against the Coolacrease executions. Offaly historian Philip McConway was pilloried for saying in the RTÉ documentary that “the IRA botched the execution in that they didn’t finish them off with head shots”. But critics such as Wall make exactly the same point in different words. What a pity Philip McConway didn’t say coup de grace. Such a genteel and delicate way of describing something so ugly!

So what's the basis for your suspicion that "that the reviewer [sic] may have been influenced by the pre-conception that the IRA were the "good guys" and so could do no wrong"? The co-author (responding to Tom Wall's review) suggests this is essentially a strawman argument: Of course the IRA would be tainted by human failings, but they also had the legitimacy of being the army of the democratic authority.

Wall on several occasions has a go at the publishers of Coolacrease, the Aubane Historical Society. He criticises the alleged “vitriolic” style of the book, without giving any actual examples of it, while having nothing to say of the inflammatory language which characterised the original RTÉ film and the many press articles that appeared in support of it. He says that “the raison d’etre of the Aubane Historical Society is to defend the received history of the national struggle against revisionism … [the two publications] endeavour to establish that the conduct of the IRA during the War of Independence was legitimate, just and untainted by sectarianism.” Well, if you set up a straw man it is not too hard to knock it down. It would be very difficult to prove that the conduct of the IRA was untainted by prejudice, greed, fornication, homophobia, drunkenness or any other human failing. In another generalisation typical of the review, Wall tells us that the book “contains background narrative on the War of Independence written from a staunchly nationalist perspective.” The perspective of the book, beyond establishing the facts surrounding the particular incident at Coolacrease, is that Sinn Féin in implementing its overwhelming electoral mandate proceeded to establish a state, that this was immediately subjected to an unlawful armed onslaught by the Imperial power, and that the Parliament established in Dublin called on Volunteers to defend its institutions, which they did in great numbers in the War of Independence. A better description of the perspective of the book would be “a staunchly democratic one”.25

For revisionists who have attempted to portray the War of Independence as a sectarian ethnic conflict driven by greed for land, the cases constructed by Hart in relation to Cork and Harris and RTÉ in relation to Coolacrease, were paraded as the ultimate proof, the crowning examples, of their theories.26 And they were lionised precisely as such by commentators in the Dublin media. But the two AHS publications discussed by Wall succeed in their task –demonstrating that, in these two particular instances (Offaly and Cork), revisionists concocted evidence to support their theories of massacre, ethnic cleansing and sectarian land grabbing by the independence movement. Those two cases now lie in tatters.

It is ironic that Tom Wall’s drb essay has been lauded as the effective riposte to the book Coolacrease, with Senator Harris stating: “Tom Wall, a self-trained historian whose scholarship would put most academic historians to shame, takes a rounded view of the Coolacrease affair. To me it seems far from favourable to Aubane.” And this despite the fact that Wall, despite his ill-based judgements and generalisations, accepts the essential evidence presented in Coolacrease that what happened there did not involve sectarian murder or a land grab, but retaliation for a paramilitary armed attack.27

Thus do houses built on sand begin to crumble!

As to the legitimacy of the 1918 Dáil and the Irish war of resistance, it is not hard to establish that the independence movement had a democratic mandate. And, notwithstanding Wall’s quibbles on this subject, that is the essence of the matter.

Wall concedes the substance of the case made against the RTE Coolacrease documentary: It wasn't a sectarian attack or a land grab, it was a execution ordered by the state against a small group of loyalists who'd attacked its forces, which was grossly botched by the soldiers sent to carry out the orders.

The RTE documentary was largely based on the misleading account of the son of one of those loyalists who ran away just before the executions were carried out. Selected historians tried to buttress that account with misleading reference to certain documents while omitting reference to conflicting evidence in others. It's contemporary political propaganda masquerading as factual documentary and academic history:

[The book] does raise the Pearsons’ later and demonstrably fraudulent claim to a British government compensation body regarding the value of their farm. This was included because the price achieved on its sale was presented in the programme as key evidence of a forced sale and subsequent land grab. Coolacrease presents evidence which conclusively demonstrates the fraudulent character of the compensation claim made by the Pearson family. It was unfortunately necessary to do this in Coolacrease because in the RTE programme two influential academics, Dr. Terence Dooley and Prof Richard English, specifically quote in sombre tones from the fraudulent “evidence” produced in support of these claims. This nonsense was broadcast without critical challenge, despite being made aware, by the authors of the book, that they were building their case on a bed of sand. Surely it is odd to characterise the presentation of the truth in the face of radical misrepresentation as a denial of human sympathy.8

Fraudulent history built upon a fraudulent claim, which panders to political prejudices both then and now.

Most of the relevant documents and commentary have been compiled by Pat Muldowney here: Indymedia Docs: Coolacrease (whose server certificate expired in February, causing a routine warning)

It includes a very well researched piece by Philip McConway on the execution and the background of the unit responsible, perhaps that and other material is best read with a map of the places named: Dowras, Co. Offaly, Ireland to Mountbolus, Co. Offaly, Ireland - Google Maps

The Pearsons Of Coolacrease, Tullamore Tribune, 7 and 14 Nov 2007 (pdf)

THE EXECUTION OF RICHARD AND ABRAHAM PEARSON
Up to thirty IRA Volunteers were involved in the operation to execute the Pearson brothers and burn down their house. The Volunteers were mostly drawn from the 3rd Battalion comprising four companies ‘A’ Killoughey, ‘B’ Kilcormac, ‘C’ Kinnitty and ‘D’ Drumcullen. The main ASU numbered about ten men, armed with rifles, who acted as the firing squad. On 30 June 1921, at 4 p.m. a number of Volunteers surrounded the Pearson’s house. Other Volunteers went to where Richard and Abraham were working in a hay field about thirty yards away.

The IRA ordered the two brothers to put up their hands and go up to the house. They were taken to a yard at the back of the house, told of the execution order, and then shot by the firing squad. The ASU botched the execution and did not carry out a coup de grâce by finishing the two brothers off with head shots. The Offaly IRA had limited experience in shootings and their training was minimal. They were not battle hardened veterans. Almost two weeks previously, the 2nd Battalion (Cloghan) IRA bungled the shooting of an informer. Three Volunteers armed with two rifles and a shotgun were lying in wait to kill the chief clerk at Perry’s mills in Belmont. The Volunteer armed with the shotgun was overly uptight and fired prematurely when the target was over sixty yards away. This lapse in military discipline enabled the fortunate man, an ex-soldier, to escape with his life.

The Offaly IRA preferred to specialise in low risk sabotage. Their activities were praised by An tÓglach, the IRA journal. The Offaly IRA blamed the flat countryside and the perceived poor terrain for their lack of success in ambushes. This was more of an excuse than a valid reason. There was a chronic lack of decisive leadership which had a debilitating affect on operations.

The No. 2 Brigade’s military deficiencies were noted by Michael McCormack, O/C 3rd Southern Division. In a correspondence with GHQ, McCormack observed: ‘Their sniping is poor, as you will doubtlessly have noticed & consequently the enemy have adapted an attitude of contempt for the Brigade in general.’ McCormack expressed disappointment how IRA training camps could not be more elaborate due to the absence of ‘good officer material.’ The inadequate educational background of many of the IRA officers hampered aspects of the training regime. Volunteers who attended a training camp during the Truce were reported to be ‘very slack in any military knowledge.’

At 6.55 p.m., while leaving the dispensary in Kinnity, Dr Frederick W. Woods was told the two Pearson brothers had been shot. Dr Woods immediately proceeded to Coolacrease on a bicycle. On arrival at 7.30 p.m. he saw Richard Pearson lying on a mattress in a field at the back of the house. By this stage Richard lost a considerable amount of blood. Had medical assistance arrived sooner the lives of the two brothers may have been saved. Richard received superficial wounds to the left shoulder, a deep wound in the right groin and right buttock.

There were also wounds to the left lower leg of a superficial nature and about six wounds to the back. Dr Woods dressed the wounds antiseptically. After attending to Abraham, Dr Woods returned to Kinnitty at about 8.45 p.m. At 10.45 p.m. the RIC came to the doctor’s house.

He again left for Coolacrease. By the time the doctor arrived Richard was already dead. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage. On examining the body again Dr Woods found a dangerous wound he had not previously discovered. Abraham was removed to Crinkle Barracks in Birr. He had extensive wounds to the left cheek, left shoulder, left thigh and the lower left leg. He was also wounded in the abdomen and the lower part of the spinal column was fractured. At 6 a.m. the next morning Abraham died from ‘shock due to gunshot wounds.’ The remains were interred at the family place at Ballacolla in Co. Laois.

The Pearson episode was tragic. However, the manner of their deaths was no less traumatic than many members of the Crown forces and IRA who died during this time. ...

Peter Lyons, IRA Intelligence Officer: ‘They [IRA] did what they should do.’

The day before the execution Sidney, the third target, left with his father to attend a wedding festival in Tipperary from where they proceeded to Mountmellick. The IRA, using hay sprinkled with petrol, set fire to the Pearson home and out houses which were completely destroyed. Ricks of hay and straw were also burned. A group of Volunteers transferring the arms used in the execution back to Kinnitty were surrounded by Crown forces but managed to escape. IRA Volunteer Peter Lyons had a peripheral involvement in the execution. He, along with another Volunteer, collected a rifle at Cloghan which was transferred to other Volunteers who in turn gave it to the IRA firing squad. Lyons blocked the road to prevent any surprise Crown force patrol interfering with the execution.

A party of Volunteers were in position in Kinnitty to harass any attempt by the Crown forces to carry out a reprisal. Over sixty years after the event Lyons remained unrepentant: ‘People look back now and say didn’t the IRA do this, and didn’t the IRA do that, but they did what they should do. I mean to say those two went out and fired on them where they were fighting for their country.’

So if shot very shortly after 4pm, it took almost 3 hours for word to reach the local doctor at 6.55pm. He attended by 7.30pm, within 35 minutes.

If the intention was to let them bleed to death, allowing the local doctor to attend would risk that plan. Especially because if reached in time and properly treated, the critical wounds might have been patched up. In fact, the doctor failed to locate one critical wound on Richard Pearson before leaving. The number of wounds may have made the task more difficult, but still possible.

The article notes the 'Propaganda fallout', referring to a Dublin Castle Statement, date-stamped 9 JUL 1921 which Pat Muldowney reproduced:

Report on the Sinn Fein Outrage at COOLACREASE HO.
Nr. CADAMSTOWN
COOLACREASE HO. is owned by a farmer named Pearson, a Protestant and a Loyalist.

... The house was then fired and the family allowed out. They were placed on a little hill just outside the back of the house. The two eldest sons were then taken, and in full view of the rest of the family were put up against a wall and shot, meanwhile the Sinn Feiners played ragtime music, on the piano and one of the sons’ violins.

The shooting was carried out so that both men should die in agony, both being hit in the stomach and thighs. As soon as the shooting was finished, the SinnFeiners beat a hasty retreat, leaving behind them a blazing house, and a group of broken-hearted women looking after two dying men. One of them died in about four hours. The other
lived for 12 hours and died in the hospital at BIRR barracks. The women were not even allowed to keep any spare clothing at all, all of it being burned in the house. ...

What you and Tom Wall are doing is rehearsing the propaganda line of Dublin Castle at the time. Do you think they played ragtime music on the piano and a violin too?

It seems more likely to me that the Pearsons were shot, another volley of shots were fired into at their fallen bodies and they were then left for dead. Richard Pearson's wounds were predominantly on the left side as reported by the local doctor to the British Military Court of Enquiry (reproduced by Muldowney, pdf), and Abraham's on the right according to the British Army doctor. There may not have been sign of life at the time they were left, or even a while after given the time taken to reach the local doctor and the nature of injuries reported by the British Army doctor who noted Abraham had a fractured lower spinal column.

An article by another local historian, Paddy Heaney who gave the original account of the Pearsons shooting in 2000 (At the Foot of Slieve Bloom) gives background to the IRA operation:

Coolacrease: A Place with a Tragic History (pdf)
By Paddy Heaney

The Flying Column of the Offaly Brigade was in a training camp at Dowras in Eglish parish near Birr. The O.C. selected nine men and told them to be ready in one hour. In the meantime two motor cars arrived. The men got on board and the O.C. rode in front on a motorcycle. On arriving in Kilcormac the men dismounted and some of them smoked or walked around. They then headed up the road for Lackaroe. John Grogan who was working on Cush Bog described to me what he saw, in the following terms: “At about 10.30 I saw a motor bike and two cars travelling up the road for Lackaroe just opposite where I was working. The convoy halted and the first car stalled. The men dismounted. After some time the second car hauled the first car away, with the motor bike positioned behind one of the cars. The men came across the bog. There were nine men and an officer in front. All the men had rifles slung over their shoulders. The officer carried a revolver. The officer was dressed in a green jacket, knee breeches and leggings, and all the men wore ordinary coats, collars and ties.” John Grogan also said: “I knew the commanding officer and he spoke to me. I did not know any of the men. It was later on in the afternoon I saw smoke rising in the Coolacrease area, and I knew what had taken place.”

In later years the commanding officer gave a full account to me of what happened on the day: “We were informed that the Pearsons were making hay in a field, not far from the house. We approached and observed two men making hay. They were Dick and Abe Pearson, and another man was working a horse. He was known locally as Jimmy Bradley.” His real name was William Stanley, a relation of the Pearsons, and a native of Laois. When he saw the column entering the field he began running towards a stile, a hundred yards away. The CO fired as he ran in a stooped zigzag fashion, and he was shot in the arm. Several shots were fired at him as he ran. He escaped but was captured at Mountbolus where he was held overnight. He was released the following morning and made his way to the RIC Barracks in Tullamore.

The Column, consisting of nine men and their Commanding Officer, brought the Pearson brothers to Coolacrease House. A court martial verdict was read out to them and they were executed by firing squad. A further twenty local IRA members were deployed in the surrounding area to provide look-out and cover for the Flying Column operation, and these did not go onto the Pearson property.

Page 21 [among corrections to Alan Stanley's account]: “… at 4 o’clock while the two men were making hay in a field … they were surrounded by about forty armed and masked men …”. There were three men in the field: the Pearson brothers and William Stanley alias Jimmy Bradley. There were not thirty or forty masked men involved. There was no need for the men to be masked. They were mostly unknown to the Pearsons. Two of them were from the North Tipperary Brigade.

The local IRA had been 'reinforced' by a CO from Galway, Thomas Burke, and in this operation with 2 Volunteers from North Tipperary. They may have left in a hurry because British troops were already in the vicinity near Kinnitty, and one suspect (loyalist, William Stanley who'd been living with them under the pseudonym 'Jimmy Bradley') had just escaped the scene.

Coolacrease is another loyalist atrocity story from Alan Stanley inspired by Peter Hart's atrocity stories about Cork. It was polished up for a RTE documentary, buttressed by a few academic historians to dignify the account with a false reading of fraudulent claims made by the surviving Pearsons and Alan Stanley. The aim being to establish a false history of the War of Independence, more amenable to modern political prejudices.

Originally Posted by Eoin Coir

Harris and Myers got great praise from academic John Paul McCarthy in last sunday's Sindo. McCarthy said that Harris's intellectual appointment to the senate by Bertie was the greatest since Garrett appointed Prof James Stooge in 1981.

Very good. Put a smile on my face.